View Plans & Pricing

If you are signed in and are seeing this message, please be sure you have selected a user name in My Profile. The forum requires it.
A A A
Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed
Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 Topic Rating: 0 (0 votes) 
sp_TopicIcon
Calling light in Blinds when getting correct pott-odds, Videos Foucault
Wappie
Grinding Micros
Members
Forum Posts: 55
Member Since:
October 9, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
December 5, 2014 - 6:40 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory
0

Hi Guys,

 

I see in the videos from Foucault, that he calls pretty light in the blinds if he get the correct pot-odds(mostly with antes in play)

 

There he did mention that if the pot-odds are correct then we can call almost with any 2 suited cards or good connected cards.

 

He does explain if we have por example ~35% equity vs V range and the pot-odds offer us around 2-1(~33%) then we need to call.

But this 35% equity of our hand is when we see 5 cards/showdown(red arrow in image)?

Cause in most situation we dont get the chance to see 5 cards.

 

Or does the % is according to how our hand has % when we only see the flop?(green arrows in image)

 

I will try to give an example without antes, blinds 100/50: V minopens the button to 200, Hero in the big blind needs 100 to call for a pot of 350.

3.5 to 1(~28%) so according to the image/example below we can call with our hand? or is this an misunderstanding?

 

(see link+image)

…..15b8605c98
 

I really try to understand this concept, but I`m not really sure if I understand it correctly

NeverAA
High Stakes Shark
Members
Forum Posts: 164
Member Since:
August 4, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
December 5, 2014 - 10:00 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

Hey,

I actually got knocked out doing this when I had a huge stack yesterday night and I will post it on the forums tonight so keep an eye.

To help answer your question, I have recently came to a decision that I will see a cheap flop whenever possible, and yes very rarely but sometimes I got so great pot odds I even see a flop with 72.
I havent watched Andrew’s video, but I am sure he will come here at some point and give you the full math.

How I go by in these situations though are not only based on pot odds. Yes, pot odds has to be there; however, the most important thing for me is which player is trying me on my blinds.

Here is how I question myself. What kind of player is putting pressure on your blind? How often does he do it? What conditions does he need to do this? How much does he raise? Does he raise the same amount all the time?

By answering most of these questions, I think we make enough case to call. Obviously as long as pot odds for us are not really screaming that we should fold.

Now I want to come back to your question briefly. You cannot assume you will not see all 5 cards. Again I am sure Andrew will get into details with this, but looking at it from math perspective, you will still have 35% chance in the long run because you cant assume he will always hit and barrel and you fold. And thats why the questions above are very important because if your timing is right and range the player well, you can be creative and take the pot down as he doesnt know your cards.

So it is actually good to see a cheap flop or even take advantage of your opponents looseness pre flop.
All in all, I am looking at the whole situation when I decide to make a move in poker. Blind play is no exception to this.

chaos
Midstakes Master
Members
Forum Posts: 132
Member Since:
November 18, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
December 5, 2014 - 10:38 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory
0

First of, I haven't seen the video but when you talk about equity versus his range you talk about showdown equity, that is, the equity of your hand at showdown and thus, equity can't be used directly against the pot odds to decide whether it is profitable to call a bet on a single street.

Another factor though is how well you hand flops as opposed to his range and comparing that to pot odds. However, from my point of view, the most important factor for calling in the blinds is not pot odds, is your post flop playing abilities. That is, it is much more of a factor whether you'd be comfortable playing the hand post flop and confident you'll either win a big pot or lose a small pot in the majority of the situations than whether the pot odds are correct for a call or not.

Foucault

TPE Pro
Members
Forum Posts: 2067
Member Since:
December 6, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
December 5, 2014 - 1:21 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

Good question wap. I'm glad to have a thread about this because people ask me about it a lot, and it will be nice to have a place to point them.

You and chaos are correct that you can't just compare your immediate pot odds to your hot-and-cold equity (meaning your equity assuming you saw five cards with no more betting). Given that you are out of position, the post-flop betting should prevent you from realizing 100% of your equity.

The thing is that when you are getting extremely good odds, you don't have to realize much of your equity to show a profit.

Let's say blinds are 350/700 with an 85 ante. The button opens to 1400 and you are in BB with Q6s. There's 2900 in the pot and you have to call 700, so you need 24% equity to show a profit on a call. Against a button opening 50% of the deck, you have 43% equity. You only need to realize 56% (24/43) of your equity to show a profit.

Your ability to realize equity is influenced by a few factors:

1. Stack depth is far and away the most important. With less money to bet, there is less room for your opponent to use his position to push you off the winning hand or to valuetown you when he is ahead. Immediate pot odds matter more the less money there is remaining to bet.

2. Your post-flop edge or lack thereof. It's easier to realize equity against predictable players, whether they are predictably passive (you usually win when you have the best hand, even if it's pretty weak, because they don't put pressure on you) or predictably aggressive (you get profitable semi-bluffs and have high implied odds when you do make a good pair, as long as you are willing to call down). Balanced players are the toughest ones to realize equity against.

3. The playability of your hand. A6o is a hand that is often a favorite against an opening range, but so much of its equity is wrapped up in spots where you have marginal hands like Ace-high, top pair with a bad kicker, or third pair that it's tough to play postflop. Q9s, on the other hand, usually makes a big pair with a decent kicker when it makes a pair, and it also has the potential to make straight and flush draws that you can play aggressively. Thus, even though A6o may have higher hot-and-cold equity, Q9s usually realizes more equity.

Wappie
Grinding Micros
Members
Forum Posts: 55
Member Since:
October 9, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
December 6, 2014 - 5:23 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

Thank you all very mutch guys, for your input time & energy.

 

Appreciate alot

NeverAA
High Stakes Shark
Members
Forum Posts: 164
Member Since:
August 4, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
December 6, 2014 - 6:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print
0

here goes the header of my topic:
“wsop 10k nightly bust hand. Playing with marginal hands from blinds.”
its under mtt poker strategy.

Forum Timezone: America/New_York

Most Users Ever Online: 2780

Currently Online:
30 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

bennymacca: 2616

Foucault: 2067

folding_aces_pre_yo: 1133

praetor: 1033

theginger45: 924

P-aire 146: 832

Turbulence: 768

The Riceman: 731

duggs: 591

florianm1: 588

Newest Members:

CSerpent

KJ

Tillery999

sdmathis89

ne0x00

adrianvaida2525

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4

Forums: 24

Topics: 12705

Posts: 75003

 

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1063

Members: 12010

Moderators: 2

Admins: 5

Administrators: RonFezBuddy, Killingbird, Tournament Poker Edge Staff, ttwist, Carlos

Moderators: sitelock, sitelock_1